Occasional musings by Nigel Fletcher, founder of the Centre for Opposition Studies and former Councillor in the Royal Borough of Greenwich. Posts on political opposition, local issues and such other aspects of life's rich tapestry as take the fancy of this tea-drinking, history-obsessed gay Tory.

Sunday, February 01, 2009

Decisions are made by those who show upA report this week has suggested the Communities Secretary Hazel Blears is considering proposals to allow Councillors to vote from the pub instead of attending Council meetings.

The suggestion is apparently being made "to help overcome the barriers of time, circumstance and distance that might discourage members from participating in meetings".

A laudable enough aim, perhaps, but the idea is misguided. As councillors, we are elected to represent our constituents on the Council. That means, amongst other things, attending Council meetings and committees - a time commitment for which we are paid an allowance. If we can't make the necessary commitment, we should not stand for office.

This of course has a particular resonance in Greenwich, where Labour Councillor Danny Thorpe remains a Councillor for Shooters Hill ward, despite living on the other side of the world. He has been in Australia for the last year, and has attended just one meeting - a cynically organised Council meeting in September contrived to allow him to fly back and avoid disqualification. Council Leader Chris Roberts has angrily defended his protege, saying that his ward colleagues are covering his work, and that as Thorpe is not claiming his allowance, there is no case to answer.

What arrogant rubbish. It's not about the money - it's about whether a Councillor can do their duty of representing their electors. Self-evidently, you can't do that from a different hemisphere of the planet. The danger of the Blears plan is that it would legitimise such behaviour.

For backbenchers like me, it is accepted that our role is part-time, so balancing work commitments can be an issue. In particular, it is frustrating when Council events or meetings are scheduled in the daytime or early evening, which makes it difficult or impossible for those with full-time jobs to attend. But most meetings are held in the evenings, which also helps members of the public who want to attend.

As Danny Thorpe's example has illustrated, the only firm attendance requirement is that a Councillor who fails to attend meetings for six months is disqualified. Beyond that, it is down to Councillors' own conscience (and the pressure of their Whips) how many meetings they attend. Some are dilligent and never miss a single one, whilst others rarely show their faces. Most are somewhere in between.

That is as it should be. Of course there are times when you have to stay late at work or have family commitments. And representing your ward doesn't begin and end at the Town Hall - many members will often prioritise a residents' meeting or community function over a routine committee at the Town Hall. It is a balancing act, but however you manage it, at some point you have to represent the views of your community within the Council, and that means meetings. I have personally made it a rule that whatever other meetings I may miss (and I'm certainly not perfect), I prioritise the monthly Full Council meetings, and have not missed a single one since I was elected in 2005.

Of course it would be easier if I could stay at home or vote from the pub, but that is not what I was elected to do. I was elected to speak up for my constituents, and give them a voice in the Council Chamber. If that duty becomes too much, the only honourable thing to do is to resign. That is what Cllr. Thorpe should have done (despite Chris Roberts instructing him not to). Inconvenient or not, decisions are made by those who show up.